this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2026
73 points (82.3% liked)

politics

30356 readers
1756 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz 106 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I have no interest in watching his video but I also have no interest in further reading the article when it talks about Nixon and his "graceful exit".

[–] SGGeorwell@lemmy.world 38 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, I seem to remember his graceful exit taking years.

[–] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago

And no one today would be referring to it as "graceful" if he had actually been prosecuted.

Nixon was granted "grace" by Ford, nothing he did himself was graceful in the slightest.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 30 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean, just the timeline shows that whoever was putting this together (Politico and NYT) had the main concern of getting Platner to drop out

They didn't care about the story, they didn't investigate anything to find the truth, they didn't even chase ratings.

They just kept dropping bombs a week before he could be forced out.

Doesn't mean he's innocent, if anything it means there needs to be an investigation into all of it. But the only way that would have happened was if Planter stayed in, won, and then had an investigation done himself.

Now that he's dropped no one is going to look into any of it, in a month he won't be in any headlines or mentioned again.

Depending on who replaces him is what may make it a big deal long term.

But the NYT just smacked down a progressive who was vocally against Israel, if it worked once the oligarchs will keep doing it. A senate seat is too important for them to just not try.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

You think no investigation happened at all?

Look, there's room to talk about the best way forward and it sucks, this really, really sucks that Platner couldn't live up to what we all had hoped. But we can have those discussions without victim blaming and indulging in conspiracy theories too much.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You think no investigation happened at all?

I, for on, don't have a bottomless well of trust for pro-Israel establishment media.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I, for one, don’t have a bottomless well of trust for men with admitted alcohol problems and violent tendencies and a history of victim blaming.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Oh God forbid people become better.

[–] Herr_S_aus_H@lemmy.zip 1 points 12 hours ago

Has he become better? Since he seems to be incapable of accountability I don't think so.

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago

The guy with the Nazi tattoo, who worked for blackwater, that has been credibly accused of sexual assault appears to be showing that he hasn't become better.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They can, but they don't get the benefit of the doubt. Increased scrutiny is one of the consequences for their actions. If they can't understand that and deal with it then they're still a shitty person.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 0 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I'd like y'all to direct some of that scrutiny at Janet Mills too.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io -1 points 8 hours ago

No she just funded and intends to continue funding the famously non-rapist IDF.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Where did he get better? When? What has he done in the last 5 years that show he got better?

Because all I see is a lot of denial and blaming everyone else but himself.

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world 0 points 22 hours ago

Mods removing every comment mentioning the Nazi tattoo. Lemmy never disappoints.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Uh... run for election on a platform of anti-imperialism and anti-Zionism?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Seeking power isn’t a restitution move.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Okay what would you consider "showing that he got better?" That a person became nicer doesn't tend to make the news.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 4 points 1 day ago

Not raping would be a fantastic start.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Restorative justice isn't just being "nicer".

Encounter is the starting point, a facilitated meeting that brings together people most impacted by crime to determine how to repair harm. Encounters start with an invitation, and all parties participate voluntarily. There are three keys to effective encounters.

Before offenders can participate, they must take responsibility for their wrong and want to make amends.

All stakeholders impacted by the wrongdoing—victims, offenders, and community members—have a voice in the justice process.

Meetings that are encounters occur in safe spaces, foster vulnerability, and include free sharing without judgment.

Maybe you victim blamers can learn a little bit about restorative justice and what Platner should've done if he actually wanted to repent.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, I think no investigation happened at all. Not one iota.

[–] NekoKoneko@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

I wanted Platner to be the guy because I do think in this moment, he would have won.

But I know first hand how traditional newspaper legal sourcing and corroboration works (yes, for all they are hateable for other reasons, that includes the NYT). Once you know how careful they are with sources, because the potential exists for even a single defamation lawsuit to utterly bankrupt the company, then you know the details in that article are both credible and passing those checks would not have been fakeable without an incredibly elaborate conspiracy.

That doesn't mean the allegations are true, but I believe it's likely they are true.

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world -5 points 1 day ago

Well hate say Told everyone so, but I was against this guy from the jump, and told everyone he was no progressive and all I got was scorn and downvoted. Hate to be right, but now we fucked and Republicans win.